EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS


The SEC is Going After Microsoft (Again), Not Just Goldman Sachs

Posted in Finance, Fraud, Microsoft, Search, Steve Ballmer at 6:49 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

US Securities and Exchange Commission Seal

Summary: The SEC (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) contacts Steve Ballmer regarding oddities in Microsoft’s latest financial report

WE WISH to begin with factual background that a lot of people are unaware of. A few months ago, right around the time that Microsoft's CFO quit he was also paid millions of dollars by Microsoft to keep his mouth shut. This is not a standard transaction. This could indicate malpractice and there is reason for prejudice because the SEC previously caught and investigated Microsoft for financial fraud (Microsoft eventually settled), after a Microsoft employee, Charles Pancerzewski, had blown the whistle and presented to the judge convincing evidence of fraud taking place at Microsoft. Microsoft paid Pancerzewski millions of dollars to shut him up and eliminate his evidence [1, 2]. It’s a typical maneuver from Microsoft, which also hires/pays critics to walk away and not share their knowledge with the public. We gave several examples of this before.

A few days ago we wrote about Microsoft’s close relationship with US banks/the Fed, which are aflood with misconduct these days. They contact Microsoft for help brainwashing the public [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9], as we noted some days ago when we wrote about the SEC suing Goldman Sachs for fraud. For those who have not read that previous post, Microsoft’s CEO was asked to create a seasonly game to teach the public about deficit crunching (Microsoft too has debt) and as this new article shows, using games to brainwash minds is not out of the ordinary (war games are the most famous example).

PepsiCo International and Microsoft have teamed up to create an integrated digital advergaming campaign to take advantage of what’s expected to be increasing interest in soccer as the World Cup gets underway.

But anyway, here is the interesting development. Pogson has found this document [PDF] buried inside the SEC’s Web site. Since it is available as a PDF, we decided to append it at the bottom as plain text. Microsoft’s response is an HTML-formatted mail and here is what Pogson makes of it:

Then, in the last quarterly report, M$ combined that other OS and “live” segments. I guess they thought a zigzag in the curve would hide something like the inflection in the client OS stuff. Further, internally, they use a different set of books, omitting some important details. So, investors should be comforted knowing that internal decisions are made on false assumptions. We have known for years that including the browser in the OS was done not for good business reasons but to exclude competition from the market. I guess that other search engine is more of the same.

There is actually more to it because Microsoft is ‘embellishing’ its numbers by deferring revenue, for example [1, 2, 3, 4]. One writer asks about Microsoft: “Are we seeing a revival?” Well, only if Microsoft’s lies are being believed because in the previous quarter just about any business unit at Microsoft was down. Yes, it was mostly down, but Microsoft claims a surge.

Let me be clear. I’m not a fan of Microsoft (NASDAQ:MSFT). I dislike its products and I don’t much like its business policies. I’m a child of the open source world and a fan of cloud computing, and Microsoft has long been a dirty word as far as I’m concerned. It’s probably a dirty word as far as many investors are concerned.

Wallstcheatsheet.com, which is another news site, has just published the article “Proof Microsoft has Become Irrelevant” and it says:

If this keeps up [for Bing] , Microsoft may want to rename it ‘Ding’ because that’s how big an impact they’ve had in the search space.

For the moment, Kin and Bing are not making huge waves.

We wrote about it in the previous post. Bing as a “success” is part of an illusion Microsoft is spreading and Kin is a major disappointment which we’ll address in the next post. There is more to Microsoft’s financial reports than meets the eye. Don’t believe what you see next week when Microsoft releases another report and immediately spins it as “success”. Microsoft is not honest about its financial situation.

Mail Stop 4561
                                                             December 11, 2009
Mr. Steven A. Ballmer
Director and Chief Executive Officer
Microsoft Corporation
One Microsoft Way,
Redmond, Washington 98052-6399

        Re:    Microsoft Corporation
               Form 10-K for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2009
               Filed July 30, 2009

Dear Mr. Ballmer:
        We have reviewed the above-referenced filing and have the following comments.
Please be as detailed as necessary in your explanation. After reviewing this information,
we may raise additional comments.

        Please understand that the purpose of our review process is to assist you in your
compliance with the applicable disclosure requirements and to enhance the overall
disclosure in your filing. We look forward to working with you in these respects. We
welcome any questions you may have about our comments or any other aspect of our
review. Feel free to call us at the telephone numbers listed at the end of this letter.
Form 10-K for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2009
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of

Segment Product Revenue/Operating Income (Loss)
Online Services Business, page 25

1.      We note that the operating loss for your Online Services Business increased by
        102% and 84% in 2008 and 2009, respectively, and is a significant portion of your

Mr. Steven Ballmer Microsoft Corporation December 11, 2009 Page 2 consolidated operating income in 2009. Tell us whether these increasing losses are indicative of future results and the consideration given to identifying and quantifying any related known trends, events and uncertainties that would reasonably be expected to have a material impact on your liquidity, capital resources and/or results of operations. Refer to Item 303(A) (3) (ii) of Regulation S-K and Section III.B.3 of SEC Release 34-48960. Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data Note 22. Segment Information and Geographic Data, page 77 2. Tell us what consideration you gave to reporting revenue from external customers for each of your products and services or each group of similar product and services in accordance with paragraph 37 of SFAS 131. 3. You indicate that your financial reporting systems provide more than one measure of segment profit and loss for management to operate the business, including internal profit and loss statements prepared on a basis not consistent with U.S. GAAP. Tell us what consideration you gave to reporting the segment information that is most consistent with that used in your consolidated financial statements. In this regard, we note that the segment information provided beginning on page 23 is presented in accordance with U.S. GAAP. Refer to paragraph 30 of SFAS 131. 4. We note your statement that segments are not designed to measure operating income or loss directly related to the products included in each segment, due to your integrated business structure. Further explain this assertion and tell us what operating costs are excluded from each segment. In light of this apparent limitation of the data, indicate how the segment information presented is reliable and relevant to users of your financial statements. 5. You state that “inter-segment cost commissions are estimated by management and used to compensate or charge each segment for such shared costs and to incent shared efforts.” Clarify for us what is meant by these estimated inter-segment cost commissions and tell us what consideration you gave to describing in the note the basis of measuring this allocation. Also, clarify what is meant by allocating cost commission “to incent shared efforts.” Explain your basis for determining the appropriate amounts that will provide motivation and justify why management believes the allocation methodology is reasonable. Refer to paragraphs 25(b) and 29 of SFAS 131. ******* Please respond to these comments within 10 business days or tell us when you will provide us with a response. Please submit all correspondence and supplemental
Mr. Steven Ballmer Microsoft Corporation December 11, 2009 Page 3 materials on EDGAR as required by Rule 101 of Regulation S-T. If you amend your filing, you may wish to provide us with marked copies of any amendment to expedite our review. Please furnish a cover letter that keys your response to our comments and provides any requested information. Detailed cover letters greatly facilitate our review. Please understand that we may have additional comments after reviewing any amendment and your response to our comments. We urge all persons who are responsible for the accuracy and adequacy of the disclosure in the filing to be certain that the filing includes all information required under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that they have provided all information investors require for an informed investment decision. Since the company and its management are in possession of all facts relating to a company’s disclosure, they are responsible for the accuracy and adequacy of the disclosures they have made. In connection with responding to our comments, please provide, in writing, a statement from the company acknowledging that: • the company is responsible for the adequacy and accuracy of the disclosure in the filing; • staff comments or changes to disclosure in response to staff comments do not foreclose the Commission from taking any action with respect to the filing; and • the company may not assert staff comments as a defense in any proceeding initiated by the Commission or any person under the federal securities laws of the United States. In addition, please be advised that the Division of Enforcement has access to all information you provide to the staff of the Division of Corporation Finance in our review of your filing or in response to our comments on your filing. You may contact Melissa Walsh, Staff Accountant, at (202) 551-3224 if you have any questions regarding comments on the financial statements and related matters. If you need further assistance, you may contact me at (202) 551-3226 Sincerely, Craig D. Wilson Sr. Asst. Chief Accountant

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one


  1. your_friend said,

    April 21, 2010 at 6:55 pm


    It’s about time the SEC got on Microsoft and their letter is quite a slap down on the usual monkey business. Well done, SEC, please follow up.

  2. uberVU - social comments said,

    April 25, 2010 at 9:21 am

    Social comments and analytics for this post…

    This post was mentioned on Identica by schestowitz: The #SEC is Going After #Microsoft (Again), Not Just #GoldmanSachs http://ur1.ca/vvaf #finance #fraud #regulation #steveballmer…

What Else is New

  1. The Latest EPO Spin: Staff Protesters Compared to 'Anti-Patent Campaigners' or 'Against UPC'

    Attempts to characterise legitimate complaints about the EPO's management as just an effort to derail the patent office itself, or even the patent system (spin courtesy of EPO and its media friends at IAM)

  2. The Serious Implication of Controversial FTI Consulting Contract: Every Press Article About EPO Could Have Been Paid for by EPO

    With nearly one million dollars dedicated in just one single year to reputation laundering, one can imagine that a lot of media coverage won't be objective, or just be synthetic EPO promotion, seeded by the EPO or its peripheral PR agents

  3. EPO: We Have Always Been at War With Europe (or Europeans)

    The European Patent Office (EPO) with its dubious attacks on free speech inside Europe further unveiled for the European public to see (as well as the international community, which oughtn't show any respect to the EPO, a de facto tyranny at the heart of Europe)

  4. What Everyone Needs to Know About the EPO's New War on Journalism

    A detailed list of facts or observations regarding the EPO's newfound love for censorship, even imposed on outside entities, including bloggers (part one of several to come)

  5. EPO Did Not Want to Take Down One Techrights Article, It Wanted to Take Down Many Articles Using Intimidation, SLAPPing, and Psychological Manipulation Late on a Friday Night

    Recalling the dirty tactics by which the European Patent Office sought to remove criticism of its dirty secret deals with large corporations, for whom it made available and was increasingly offering preferential treatment

  6. The European Private Office: What Was Once a Public Service is Now Crony Capitalism With Private Contractors

    The increasing privatisation of the European Patent Office (EPO), resembling what happens in the UK to the NHS, shows that the real goal is to crush the quality of the service and instead serve a bunch of rich and powerful interests, in defiance of the original goals of this well-funded (by taxpayers) organisation

  7. Microsoft Once Again Disregards People's Settings and Abuses Them, Again Pretends It's Just an Accident

    A conceited corporation, Microsoft, shows not only that it exploits its botnet to forcibly download massive binaries without consent but also that it vainly overrides people's privacy settings to spy on these people, sometimes with help from malicious hardware vendors such as Dell or Lenovo

  8. When the EPO Liaised With Capone (Literally) to Silence Bloggers, Delete Articles

    A dissection of the EPO's current media strategy, which involves not only funneling money into the media but also actively silencing opposing views

  9. Blogger Who Wrote About the EPO's Abuses Retires

    Bloggers' independent rebuttal capability against a media apparatus that is deep in the EPO's pocket is greatly diminished as Jeremy Phillips suddenly retires

  10. Leaked: EPO Award of €880,000 “in Order to Address the Media Presence of the EPO” (Reputation Laundering)

    The European Patent Office, a public body, wastes extravagant amounts of money on public relations (for 'damage control', like FIFA's) in an effort to undermine critics, not only among staff (internally) but also among the media (externally)

  11. Links 27/11/2015: KDE Plasma 5.5 Plans, Oracle Linux 7.2

    Links for the day

  12. Documents Needed: Contract or Information About EPO PR/Media Campaign to Mislead the World

    Rumour that the EPO spends almost as much as a million US dollars “with some selected press agencies to refurbish the image of the EPO”

  13. Guest Post: The EPO, EPC, Unitary Patent and the Money Issue

    Remarks on the Unitary Patent (UP) and the lesser-known aspects of the EPO and EPC, where the “real issue is money, about which very little is discussed in public...”

  14. Saving the Integrity of the European Patent Office (EPO)

    Some timely perspective on what's needed at the European Patent Office, which was detabilised by 'virtue' of making tyrants its official figureheads

  15. A Call for Bloggers and Journalists: Did EPO Intimidate and Threaten You Too? Please Speak Out.

    An effort to discover just how many people out there have been subjected to censorship and/or self-censorship by EPO aggression against the media

  16. European Patent Office (EPO) a “Kingdom Above the EU Countries, a Tyranny With ZERO Accountability”

    Criticism of the EPO's thuggish behaviour and endless efforts to crush dissenting voices by all means available, even when these means are in clear violation of international or European laws

  17. Links 26/11/2015: The $5 Raspberry Pi Zero, Running Sans Systemd Gets Hard

    Links for the day

  18. EPO Management Needs to Finally Recognise That It Itself is the Issue, Not the Staff or the Unions

    A showing of dissent even from the representatives whom the EPO tightly controls and why the latest union-busting goes a lot further than most people realise

  19. Even the EPO Central Staff Committee is Unhappy With EPO Management

    The questions asked by the Central Staff Committee shared for the public to see that not only a single union is concerned about the management's behaviour

  20. The Broken Window Economics of Patent Trolls Are Already Coming to Europe

    The plague which is widely known as patent trolls (non-practicing entities that prey on practicing companies) is being spread to Europe, owing in part to misguided policies and patent maximalists

  21. Debunking the EPO's Latest Marketing Nonsense From Les Échos and More on Benoît Battistelli's Nastygram to French Politician

    Our detailed remarks about French brainwash from the EPO's media partner (with Benoît Battistelli extensively quoted) and the concerns increasingly raised by French politicians, who urge for national or even continental intervention

  22. The Sun King Delusion: The Views of Techrights Are Just a Mirror of EPO Staff Unions

    Tackling some emerging spin we have seen coming from Battistelli's private letters -- spin which strives to project the views of Techrights onto staff unions and why it's very hypocritical a form of spin

  23. Links 25/11/2015: Webconverger 33.1, Netrunner 17 Released

    Links for the day

  24. United They Stand: FFPE-EPO Supports Suspended Staff Representatives From SUEPO

    An obscure union from the Dutch side of things at the EPO is expressing support for the suspended colleagues from SUEPO (more German than Dutch)

  25. Censoring WIPR Article About Censorship by EPO

    A testament to how terrified journalists have become when it comes to EPO coverage, to the point of deleting entire paragraphs

  26. Censorship at the EPO Escalates: Now We Have Threats to Sue Publishers

    Having already blocked Techrights, the EPO's management proceeds to further suppressions of speech, impeding its staff's access to independently-distributed information (neither ordinary staff nor management)

  27. Response to Bogus Accusations That EPO Staff Protests Are Really an Attempt to Derail UPC

    Common myths about staff protests in the European Patent Office (EPO) debunked, with some additional background and general perspective on recent events, the unitary patent (UPC) and so on

  28. New Heise Article Makes It Clear That 'Nazi'-Themed Accusations Against the Suspended Board Judge Were Insufficiently Substantiated

    The personal attacks on a judge who was illegally suspended (a so-called 'house ban') increasingly look like the management's own campaign of defamation, mostly intended to marginalise and punish a judge who spoke about serious charges against VP4 (Željko Topić)

  29. Links 24/11/2015: Asus Chromebit CS10, Second Linux 4.4 RC

    Links for the day

  30. European Central Bank Staff Committee Adds to Growing Pressure on Abusive EPO Management

    The staff representatives of the European Central Bank E-mail their colleagues -- with European Central Bank managers' approval -- regarding the European Patent Office and its attacks on staff unions


RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time


Recent Posts